Win it Warren
This post is part of Ordinary Time’s symposium of contributor’s Democratic primary endorsements. The views and endorsement expressed are the author’s alone.
Elizabeth Warren has a plan for it. I get it. This is a cliche. This is possibly one of the more unfriendly to Warren blogs out there but I am going to make my stump post for her.
In brief, she is smart and knows her shit. I don’t think anyone at OT would be shocked by my complete disdain for Trump. I think he is a racist, xenophobic, cruel, autocratic, ignorant, lazy, incompetent, corrupt, and probably suffering from cognitive decline and/or senile dementia. Elizabeth Warren is from a modest background. She grew up in a lower-middle-class family in Oklahoma. Her dad lost his job. Her mom needed to work to support the family. Are you tired of the Presidency being dominated by people from the Ivy League? Elizabeth Warren received her undergrad degree from the University of Houston and her law degree from Rutgers Law School. Both of these are public institutions. She is the rare person to make it from public schools to an Ivy League professorship.
Are you afraid Elizabeth Warren will face the same sexist backlash that plagued Hilary Clinton or that she will get tarred because she taught at Harvard Law and lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts? She can successfully stump in West Virginia. I’ve seen, but currently cannot find, polling that suggests Warren’s main base of support is affluent white liberals. That probably fits me as a descriptor to a t. Yet, while I think almost all the Democratic hopefuls dedicated themselves admirably to the public service, I think Warren’s plans are aimed at helping all Americans achieve a level of stability and comfort that has been lacking for many, maybe most in recent years.
Concerned about how younger voters are too into “socialism?” Elizabeth Warren considers her self a capitalist. Despite many decades of right-wing propaganda, not everything to the left of the Koch Brothers or the animated corpse of Andrew Mellon is “socialism.” There is a role for the government to regulate and counterbalance the most greedy aspects of business so it does not crash and burn or make everyday Americans suffer the hardships.
The 2020 election is not going to be an easy election mentally and emotionally. I think Trump’s recent actions show that he and/or his staffers think the best hope for reelection is out and loud white nationalism. Maybe they are hoping that this can lead to another 2016 scenario where Trump loses the popular vote soundly but wins the electoral college easily. There are no easy moral choices often but with Elizabeth Warren, you have a candidate who comes from a non-elite background, one who cares deeply about the struggles of everyday citizens, and one who rejects the despicable racism and vulgarity of Trump. Plus, she can think things through. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a President who is not pure and constant ID?
She name-checked indian reservations in her closing statement; do you figure that was more of a “checklist of disadvantaged people” or a deliberate call-out?Report
Why not both?Report
As I mentioned in other threads, Trump helps Warren’s cause.
I mean, its tough to make the case that Warren’s Socialism is wrong only because it doesn’t contain enough Nationalism.
“We want the government to take control of the factors of production and distribute them to the peasants! No, not those peasants, us peasants over here!”Report
I take it as given that, for better or worse, the Full Liz Agenda, like the Full Bernie Agenda, will not pass, and we will, at best, get some reasonable improvements in their respective directions. I treat the Full Agendas as opening bids, and decline to get into the weeds about the details of this proposal or that. The question for me is not so much what is in the candidates’ position papers, but how they will restore honest, fact-based administration, who will staff up their governments, how good a job they will do on attaining what is attainable without leaving money on the table, and whether they can make America a grown-up on the world stage again. And, most important, can they beat Trump? Most of the candidates seem acceptable to me, none is my Platonic ideal. I wait and hope to see.Report
In brief, she is smart and knows her shit.
This is the same Elizabeth Warren who went viral by not understanding why overnight, fully-secured loans have lower interest rates than long-run, unsecured loans?
As I recall, she also got famously confused about the difference between the average productivity of all workers and the marginal product of minimum wage workers.Report
To be fair, this is not inconsistent with being smart and knowing her shit! As a former law professor, economics isn’t her shit. But her agenda is pretty heavily economics-focused, and on that front, she seems to be very highly in sync with my least-informed acquaintances.Report
I think you’re basically right here. People keep insisting she is ridiculously smart and has detailed plans, but I don’t see her plans as reflecting a lot of thought. This is true of a lot of candidates, of course, but I don’t generally hear people talk about how brilliant Bernie Sanders is as I do hear about WarrenReport
I missed the Warren doesn’t understand how interest rates work thing. Can you point me to where this was?
Is this about her failed student loan bill? If so, it seems like a gross mischaracterization to me. But such things go viral all the time.Report
US News: What Elizabeth Warren gets wrong and right about student loans
She wanted them set at 0.78%, but their default rate is similar to credit cards.
A worse issue is her wealth tax. If your money is bonds and she’s taxing it at a rate comparable to or higher than the interest rate you’re getting, once you factor in inflation, you’d be better off putting your money in your mattress. The same is true for stocks.
Unlike other revenue streams, she intends to tax your capital, not your interest, and at even very low tax rates that changes the calculus dramatically. Trillions of dollars would be withdrawn from the stock market and the likely result would be a deep crash followed by a depression.
She is not smart. Not smart at all.Report
So I read your essay and I understand that you like Warren and you dislike Trump, but I didn’t really walk away with a reason to vote *FOR* her rather than why she’d be just as good a choice for not-Trump as any.
In brief, she is smart and knows her shit.
This applies to every candidate up there, from Yang to Williamson. Why should I vote for *WARREN*?
Elizabeth Warren considers her self a capitalist.
While this doesn’t apply to everybody up there (Bernie, maybe Williamson), it applies to most of them. Why Warren?Report
1. I don’t think President is an entry-level political job and Donald Trump proves this. Elizabeth Warren is a senator.
2. She has much bigger policy chops than Yang and Williamson.
3. Williamson might seem warm and fuzzy but she is anti-vaxx curious and that is bad from a public health prospective.
4. This essay on Williamson from Bertlasky is on point:
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/marianne-williamson-s-democratic-debate-performance-raised-eyebrows-she-s-ncna1035956
“But this supposedly empowering rhetoric masks a mean-spirited individualism. Williamson, like conservative thinkers, often blames material problems on personal failures. Her ideology may sound airy and inoffensive, but it is ultimately one of neoliberal victim shaming. And it would lead to harmful policies if she were, by some miracle, to be elected to public office.”
In the 1980s she was telling gay men that were HIV positive that it was their fault for getting the virus.
5. You already admitted that you were probably not voting for the Democratic candidate. I don’t find your “I might do this if I find an oddball candidate” persuasive or impressive.Report
I asked you about why I should vote for Warren and you talked about Yang and Williamson.
You’re not giving me reasons to vote for her, Saul. You’re giving me reasons to vote against Trump and vote against Yang and vote against Williamson.Report
“You’re giving me reasons to vote against Trump”
But isn’t that enough of a reason, Jaybird? I mean what difference, at this point, does it make? Elizabeth Warren is reporting for duty!Report
@jaybird – Let me add a few reasons to vote *FOR* Warren.
CFPB – This is a major accomplishment that she carries a significant share of the blame/responsibility for. This was done without any real power. This was her idea and likely would have died without her work to keep it both alive and viable. She can build coalitions and get policy implemented.
She has a decade of the hard right attacking her. She is still standing and they have little to show for it. The only things I can think of that remotely stuck are “Pocahontas” and “You didn’t build that”.
Being a harvard professor I expect that she is well versed in laying smackdown on fratboy antics in ways that get heard by fellow fratboys. I expect that she is probably one of the best suited to handle debates with Trump.Report
I’m still undecided but narrowing down to Harris or Warren.
For me, they both are the most skilled in communicating the contemporary liberal position in terms nonliberals can grasp and find agreeable.
The rest of the candidates seem like they are channeling 1990 era Bill Clintonism.Report
Bernie is channeling 1990 era Slick Willie?Report
Sorry, I missed him.
He’s not of course. I just don’t think he has the leadership qualities to expand his base, and Harris/ Warren do.Report
You and I agree on that. He still uses “we need a revolution!” as an answer to policy questions way too much. I think the primary so far has pretty definitively demonstrated that Bernie has Berned out.Report
I have plenty of respect for Warren but when she raised her hand for abolishing private insurance I downgraded her from vying for my #2 spot to a distant fifth. One can argue about it policy wise but it’s utter poison politically. I just don’t think she’ll be the most effective candidate against Trump.
It also -really- doesn’t help that if she wins the GOP governor of her state gets to appoint a republican Senator to replace her.Report
The second paragraph is why I go back and forth between Warren and Harris. I am starting to wonder if a lot of our messes have moral fixes that are politically untenable in the short term.Report
“Are you tired of the Presidency being dominated by people from the Ivy League? Elizabeth Warren received her undergrad degree from the University of Houston and her law degree from Rutgers Law School. Both of these are public institutions. She is the rare person to make it from public schools to an Ivy League professorship.”
If you are tired of the Presidency being dominated by Ivy League graduates you should totally vote for someone that was a professor there instead!
Ugh…Report